ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00008152
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Cleaner | Cleaning Sector |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00010842-001 | 13/04/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00010842-002 | 13/04/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00010842-003 | 13/04/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00010842-004 | 13/04/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00010842-005 | 13/04/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 24/08/2017
Venue: Ardboyne Hotel, Navan, Co. Meath
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Walsh
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and under Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 and under Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 and under Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
The Complainant was employed as a cleaner by the Respondent from the 17th of September 2016 to the 28th of March 2017. She alleges that the Respondent failed to pay her wages due contrary to Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, that he failed to provide her with a written statement outlining her terms and conditions of employment contrary to Section 3 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994, that he failed to provide her with annual leave entitlements and public holiday entitlements contrary to Sections 19 and 21 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. She filed a complaint with the Workplace Relations Commission on the 13th of April, 2017. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Complaint 1: CA-00010842-001 The Respondent deducted €100 from her wages on the 14th of October 2016 for attending a course in Safe Pass training. She was not informed about this deduction and she did not give her permission for it. She was required to attend this course during her period of employment and the Respondent organised the course. The Respondent had no right to deduct the €100 from her wages. The Respondent also failed to pay her for the day that she spent attending the course. The hours worked out at 9 hours. She is therefore entitled to €90.
Complaint 2: CA-00010842-002 Over a number of months, the Respondent failed to pay her for hours she was due. W/C 5/12/2016 Not paid for 13 hours @€10 p/h = €130 W/C 12/12/2016 Not paid for 7 hours @ €10 p/h = €70 W/C 19/12/16 Not paid for 9 hours @ €10 p/h = €90 W/C 30/01/17 Not paid for 5.2 hours @ €10 p/h = €52 W/C 9/2/17 Not paid for 7.5 hours ´@ €10 p/h = €75
Total Due: €417
Complaint 3: CA-00010842-003 The Complainant was not provided with a written statement outlining her Terms and Conditions of Employment contrary to Section 3.(1) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994. Complaint 4:CA-00010842-004 The Complainant did not receive her annual leave entitlements contrary to Section 19 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. She worked 436 hours for the Respondent. The hours due to her in annual leave entitlement total 39.42. Wages due to her for those hours amount to €349 and 20 cent. Complaint 5 - CA-00010842-005 The Complainant did not receive her public holiday entitlements contrary to Section 21 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. She is due 36 hours from the Respondent. Wages due to her for those hours amount to €360.
|
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent’s representative stated at the hearing that he was not familiar with most of the detail of the complainant’s complaints. He conceded that the complaints were valid. |
Findings:
Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, I find that the complaints are well-founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Complaint 1: CA-00010842-001 Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, I find that this complaint is well-founded. I order the Respondent to pay to the Complainant, compensation in the sum of €190 for breaches of Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. This sum must be paid within the period of 6 weeks from the date of this decision.
Complaint 2: CA-00010842-002 Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, I find that this complaint is well-founded. I order the Respondent to pay to the Complainant, compensation in the sum of €417 for breaches of Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. This sum must be paid within the period of 6 weeks from the date of this decision.
Complaint 3: CA-00010842-003 Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, I find that this complaint is well-founded. I recommend that the Respondent pay to the Complainant compensation in the sum of €900 for breaches of Section 3(1) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994. This sum should be paid within 6 weeks of the date of this recommendation. Complaint 4:CA-00010842-004 Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, I find that this complaint is well-founded. I order that the Respondent pay to the Complainant compensation in the sum of €349.20 for breaches of Section 19 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. This sum must be paid within 6 weeks of the date of this decision. Complaint 5 - CA-00010842-005 Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, I find that this complaint is well-founded. I order that the Respondent pay to the Complainant compensation in the sum of €360 for breaches of Section 21 of the Organisation of Working Time act, 1997. This sum must be paid within 6 weeks of the date of this decision. |
Dated: 14/09/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Walsh